I don't know if this is the right place...

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Sothis » Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:56 pm

2046 wrote:Snip huge volumes of aggressive posturing
The fact is, your very first, overly-simplistic response was
1. Hyperlanes are only a road safety thing. Going off-lane is perfectly fine.
represented a complete misrepresentation of my original point. The implication of saying I am claiming it's perfectly fine would suggest I think there is near-zero chance of any danger. I have not claimed this, but you certainly implied I had claimed this, then went off on one about points-scoring, posturing etc (I think you're projecting a lot of your own methods on to me).

You seem (judging from the bluster, the little insulting remarks placed throughout your posts, and misrepresentation of my points) quite keen for me to resurrect a ten-year old page. Judging on the evidence thus far, I'd be quite justified in doing so.

Since Mike DiCenso pointed out the lanes business to me, my position has been consistent. I'm sorry if I have not simplified my explanation enough for you, but perhaps, instead of attacking my comprehensive skills you should work on your own?

For example, I do not claim a
slight lack of velocity or slight lack of safety
, nor do I claim any problems can be
mitigated easily
Saying it can be done is not the same as saying it's easy and simple - something you are not grasping about my arguments even though I've said it repeatedly.
2046 wrote:The above is total nonsense, and not just because of "unguarded Separatist targets" as if the Separatist military doesn't understand leaving some defensive units behind. All you have provided is an imagined notion that the Republic might realize Separatist ships are missing and launch an all-out attack, which seems kind of silly if they don't know where all those ships are, eh?
Again, you're misrepresenting me. I do not claim the Republic is automatically going to learn of Separatist movements down slower routes - I say if[/] the Republic learns of such a move, it would leave the Separatists vulnerable, which obviously it would. In such a scenario, depending on what the Separatist targets are, they might leave some targets undefended by anything except static defences and others might have small defensive fleets - but this is a nitpick on your part, since the point of my argument is clear - taking the slower path in the hope of surprising the enemy is a tactical risk if discovered.

[/quote="2046"]No, that would be a silly analogy because (1) it presumes the Chinese just go en masse . . . good grief, that's twice you've argued that military folks have no brain . . . and (2) it has jack all to do with going off-road when defenders are only defending roads, which was the point you chose to try to pretend to miss.[/quote]

Of course it's a silly analogy - your original scenario was silly, so any responses are destined to be. It's not my fault you've constructed a poor example.

I can see I have to spell it out for you - and perhaps address my own choice of words a little better.

Whether the Chinese commit all their forces or even a significant percentage of them (say, 40%, to try and get in behind the lines or to outflank the Americans), they will leave themselves potentially vulnerable. If the Americans were to get wind that 40% of Chinese forces had left their positions and were traveling along a slower route in the hope of secretly attacking US positions, the US could then send say, 80% of their own forces, attack a weakened Chinese defensive force, and still get back to their own positions in time to defend them against the Chinese offensive force. This is not a difficult example to grasp, and applied to The Clone Wars, you get similar problems for both the Republic and the Separatists - neither side is quite prepared to risk getting their positions smashed, in case any longer attack plans are discovered and they leave themselves open to attack.

2046 wrote:Utter nonsense as already described, and in addition this "difference of a few days could be crucial" thing strikes me as a rather desperate attempt to feign having an argument given the months of Ryloth and Geonosis and such.

Embedded conflict in certain locations is inevitable in any war. This does not disprove anything I have said about chancing surprise attacks. And of course, the other major consideration is having the ships available for such attacks - and they may simply not be available.

2046 wrote:By your rationale, the Republic strategy meeting the Seppies tried to blow up with the fuel from the Void planet was, by virtue of so many Republic ships being off the front lines, certain to have resulted in the loss of a Republic world or something. That's just nonsensical.


Not what I am claiming either.

2046 wrote:No, I don't presume the system is the same. I demonstrate it. But if you know of another system in the Star Wars galaxy with an identically-colored planet and triad of moons, feel free to point it out.

I would consider that a more impressive feat than your inability to understand that seeing orbiting bodies from wildly different angles is not the same thing as "beyond remarkable" orbital mechanics.

But hey, even if you're right about the orbital mechanics, guess what? You're wrong, because it's still Hoth:

No, you don't demonstrate it. For the system to be Hoth based on your pictures, would require either fast-swinging ecliptic orbits for the other planets/moons, and it would require at least one of them to change size as well. In the end though, it's not vital either way whether it's Hoth.

Why you ask? Because Death Squadron obviously didn't start the film in the Hoth system - they jumped to Hoth from another, unknown location. You will no doubt point out the original notion that a probe can be used to scout safe hyper routes - this remains possible (the ISD launched several probes in different directions - there is little point in them all remaining in the same system).

2046 wrote:Please work harder to make arguments worth taking seriously. Currently you appear to be engaged only in "resistance typing" . . . tossing out words only so that you can appear to have replied and so that the debate can appear to still be on.

But on any logical level, the debate on these topics is currently over. You can re-open debate at your leisure by posting topical arguments.

Thank you, and have a nice day.


Ok, so fair enough, at the end of the last post, I made a mistake. I will try to be more careful in the future, but, it would be appreciated if you can drop the aggressive rhetoric and posturing that has been quite prevalent in your posts thus far.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Sep 01, 2014 10:42 pm

Hyperlanes might be related to speed, but they might be related to volume as well.
I'm not knowledgeable of TCWW, enough, but weren't hyperlanes largely talked about regarding the displacement of large fleets?

Perhaps the problem isn't one of debris, but one of medium integrity.
Let's say those hyperlanes are capable of withstanding the displacement of a large concentration of ships without having to worry about the hyperdrives failing to keep the compass aligned with the destination?

Moving a small cargo or yatch through hyperspace from butthole world A to butthole world B creates minimal "waves" of perturbation, but things start to get tricky when you're talking about entire fleets and their fuel and spare parts support.
Perhaps hyperlanes are stabilized by either devices or crafts that frequently ride the lanes up and down to clean and smoothen them.

What's my point?
Huh, you tell me.
I'm just too tired... -_-

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by 2046 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:12 am

Sothis, we have a history, as I've already pointed out. But since you're engaged in trying to pretend you're the wounded party in this thread, let's review what's happened, hmm?

1. I posted a summary of your claims from your response to Mike, and gave very brief opinions. The worst thing I said was a dismissive "Ugh. Just no." and a comment about a "weird claim".
2. You claimed I had grossly oversimplified the off-lane part. (The irony, to me, is that folks always complain about my excessive length, but here I'm getting complaints when I only put in a little bit of text.) You neglect to meaningfully reply to the Nexus Route and defenses point.
3. In the interests of fair play, I pare down the multiple topics to one, that being hyperlanes. In my post, I devoted one of the seven paragraphs to expressing curiosity at your complaint, and noted that it was part of a historical trend of odd complaints and general comprehension difficulties, though I put it more politely at the time. I also diplomatically explored the points of commonality in our seemingly-disparate views inasmuch as the capacity to go off-lane, but reiterated the Nexus Route and defenses point.
4. You double down on the summarization complaint and suggest that my summary was a dig against you. The post is scarcely readable due to quote formatting problems, but from what I can tell you seemed to handwave away the arguments by suggesting your claim is the one based on "all existing canon information", which has more than a whiff of insult about it. At the end you diplomatically acknowledge the plausibility of my arguments, but follow that up immediately by saying you think yours are equally plausible, which was just obnoxious. (In a debate between blue-sky and red-sky where blue-sky has been demonstrated and red-sky proven wrong, it's the red-sky guy saying "well, you may have a point, but I still think I'm right.") Put simply, the overall tone was challenging and off-putting, and you still had not addressed the Nexus Route and defenses point.
5. I open my next post pointing out the quote tag issue, and then lay into you regarding the summarization complaint because you keep saying what I said you said. I then suggest you drop it, as it smells of a points-scoring enterprise. I then go on to tear into the rest of your case with suitable disdain in response to your choice of tone.
6. You feign ignorance on quoting and declare that a nitpick, as if requesting you make your posts readable was some sort of points-scoring endeavor on my part. You then spend most of the rest of the post trying to continue your points-scoring and complaining. Topically-speaking, the only signficant content was your Hoth base claim. You still hadn't responded meaningfully to the Nexus Route and defenses point.

Now, I will here grant that my disdain in the prior post certainly contributed to your desire to respond in kind, just as your tone in the prior post led me toward the disdain. However, make no mistake . . . you are in no way the example of any high road here.

7. I open with "So I suggested dropping the points-scoring squabbly nonsense and you devoted virtually your entire post to it? Ugh. Rather than feed the proverbial troll, I will simply try to parse out the actual topical bits" . . . the post is very short. I note that your Hoth assertion begs the question.
8. You declare that I've engaged in "hot air and posturing" and whatnot, again skipping the opportunity to cut out the crap. The second part of your post reinforces my position about the summarization complaint, and the third part involves you treating your Hoth assertion as fact and also claiming that my arguments do not disprove your claims. So, still nothing meaningful on the Nexus Route and defenses.
9. In a much longer post, I snip out your nonsense and proceed with the ripping apart of your claims. There is a touch of disdain present (e.g. "even below you just dodge"), but much subdued compared to the fifth post.
10. In a long post, you again harp on the silly summarization complaint, and beyond that make (1)a really silly dodge argument over an analogy, (2) continue to assume what you seek to prove, (3) make a nonsensical claim about the use of secret roads leading to ruin, (4) argue against the Hoth probe droid origin, long since proven, and (5) also misunderstand me, claiming I made an admission supportive of your case when in reality I was simply paraphrasing you. Though the post was long, there wasn't actually anything much of any value there, and you still hadn't dealt meaningfully with the Nexus Route and defenses.

So basically, to my mind, the post was completely absurd and a waste of my time, nothing more than "resistance typing". (By the way, thanks for inspiring me to name that concept . . . I've discussed it before elsewhere, but in a more roundabout way since I had no name for it.)

11. In a return to disdain, I opt to have some fun with the situation. I conclude by noting that "But on any logical level, the debate on these topics is currently over. You can re-open debate at your leisure by posting topical arguments."

So now we have your reply . . . and quite simply, you failed. Instead we get "I know you are, but what am I?"-level silliness, more of the nonsense where you're trying to claim "complete misrepresentation" of what you say when you actually state it (albeit only sometimes, when you think it helps you to do so), agree that what I said is correct, et cetera . . . and might I add, claiming this is misrepresentation by implication, which is a rather interesting point of view. And, of course, you're still trying to complain about analogies rather than address them.

Put simply, your entire post was nothing more than resistance typing. You wouldn't even concede about Hoth! Your false claims and posturing to the contrary aside, you are emphatically not interested in a civil discussion. You've had plenty of opportunity to cut the crap and stick to a reasonable discussion but, unlike my attempts in posts 7 and 9, you have availed yourself of none of them, and instead you keep trying to bring up the summary squabble.
You seem (judging from the bluster, the little insulting remarks placed throughout your posts, and misrepresentation of my points) quite keen for me to resurrect a ten-year old page. Judging on the evidence thus far, I'd be quite justified in doing so.
If you wish to embarrass yourself further, be my guest. What, you're seeking to prove that I can be made to turn up the jackass when prompted? Ooooooh, the world will be shocked! Shocked, I say!

Of course I'm a jackass with little patience for nonsense. I've been dealing with the likes of you for over a decade.

As for me, I'm done here. I'm not going to feed time vampires. If there is any merit to your claims, it is clear it will not be you who elucidates it.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:21 am

Ok fellas, in the end I find that this exchange between the two of you has been rather shy on advancing reasons as to why wandering off hyperlanes is such an issue for the GAR. Maybe we could work it out, productively? :)
2046 wrote:So I suggested dropping the points-scoring squabbly nonsense and you devoted virtually your entire post to it?

Ugh.

Rather than feed the proverbial troll, I will simply try to parse out the actual topical bits:

1. You claim that off-lane travel involves some sort of unspecified risk, yet you also believe this risk can be mitigated with information.

Again, this makes no sense given the Nexus Route and hyperlane-based defenses. You have not responded to this point. Claiming that ships entering hyperspace in the Original Trilogy without explicitly referring to hyperlanes somehow contradicts hyperlane importance is absurd. Even your Hoth example is provided in a question-begging manner . . . it makes more sense to understand it with regards to hyperlanes for consistency than to claim it supports your point because racecar.

Again I point to the KITT example which you have failed to properly understand.

1a. You claim that off-lane travel may be slightly slower.

Nexus Route. Defenses. War.

Until you can argue against such points, your claim is simply invalid.
I kinda find Sothis' post fair enough. Actually, more than half of the post you quote from him deals with the arguments, not accusations or defenses against accusations regarding motives for debates or its relevant methods.

Both of you are correct. Yes, blockading or mining hyperlanes poses a major problem to large armies in the middle of a war. Yes, the GAR was willing to find another hyperlane, even if it meant going through Hutt space and taking a detour, rather than build themselves a new one. And yes, in the movies, you don't get the impression that anyone really is forced to follow the hyperlanes, simply because that concept didn't even exist.
At worst, a miscalculation would put you through a star, that was all.
Now, it's true that mentionning hyperlanes needn't be done all the time, and TCW hardly mentions them at all, save for very few occasions relevant to massive logistics, in the middle of a war.

Sothis' point that it may take time, say lots of time, to build a safe passage, especially for an entire fleet, is sound, although not necessary emphasizing enough the need for a safe passage precisely. More to the point, it does not elucidate what is so unsafe about plain old interstellar space and why the GAR would shit its pants about going across wilderness when they certainly must have good enough star charts for at least stars, planets and moons, plus some stray comets eventually. And seriously, a comet, what's the risk of hitting one? And is a comet even relevant to hyperspace travel?
Perhaps we should reconsider this as well? What is the slightest asteroid meant maximum danger? Decades of EU have sort of brainwashed into making us think only stellar bodies with a strong gravitational field were of influence. But I think this was based on Han's remark about plotting a course. Are all pilots really suicidal? I doubt so, yet that would be the idea if anytime you went into hyperspace, you knew that the slightest piece of rock would put an end to your blue tunnel-looking superspeed trip across the stars.
I still can't picture asteroids being that bad when in hyperspace. Can you?
But then this means empty space (99.9999999999999999999% empty) is actually super safe, no matter what.

And if there is no such risk, then what advantage hyperlanes provide?
What are hyperlanes?
Are they natural occurances or artificial?
Are machines used to maintain this state or are they made of some special but still natural stuff? Are they hyperspace currents? Maybe a special manifestation of the Force itself? A residual sliver/trail of concentrated Force-related phenomenon that really allows hyperspace to be amplified or at least simplified?
Are hyperlanes some kind of predrilled or smoothed tunnels that increase speed and traffic volume? Are they tunnels where hyperspace itself is more fluid, already sheared or something?

If hyperspace is more of a medium with some matter of some kind, perhaps drilling a tunnel through that takes time and fuel, and meets lots of resistance.
Then a hyperspace tunnel, or hyperlane, would guarantee a stable route despite high traffic, would guarantee top speeds no matter what, and would guarantee lesser fuel expenditure.
All of this, for example, would certainly matter A LOT to an army on a budget (and the GAR definitely is) that has to move behemoth ships...

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by 2046 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:46 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:I kinda find Sothis' post fair enough. Actually, more than half of the post you quote from him deals with the arguments, not accusations or defenses against accusations regarding motives for debates or its relevant methods.
No, in context with the previous posts, anything but the Hoth bit that wasn't attacking me was mere restatement or dodging.
Both of you are correct.
Not possible. I think perhaps you have seen my text poorly quoted in his posts and misunderstood, to wit:
Sothis' point that it may take time, say lots of time, to build a safe passage, especially for an entire fleet, is sound
That is not his claim. He claimed that finding safe passages was very quick. Reference his argument of the Imperials getting to Hoth easily (presupposing that Hoth was somewhere far off-lane), or his claim that "Furthermore, the OT demonstrates off-lane travel is possible, and a matter of using sensors and starcharts to plot a safe route. Luke's passage to Dagobah was a journey to an uncharted world, yet Luke was able to get there. Likewise, Luke was able to get from Dagobah to Bespin in short order (heading from said uncharted world)."

In short, it can be done in the space of the film, he says. Now, he may have also made contrary statements that I'm not recalling, but that's part of the reason I have no patience with him.
What are hyperlanes?
Are they natural occurances or artificial?
Are machines used to maintain this state or are they made of some special but still natural stuff? Are they hyperspace currents? Maybe a special manifestation of the Force itself? A residual sliver/trail of concentrated Force-related phenomenon that really allows hyperspace to be amplified or at least simplified?
Are hyperlanes some kind of predrilled or smoothed tunnels that increase speed and traffic volume? Are they tunnels where hyperspace itself is more fluid, already sheared or something?
All good questions which an honest researcher would seek to answer, rather than presupposing and begging the questions.

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Sothis » Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:48 pm

2046 wrote:SNIP huge, long-winded justifications for mispresenting my position, twisting my tone, justification of your own aggression, etc.
I'm not going to waste time pouring over your posturing. You keep accusing me of such behaviour, but you instigated it, and you are perpetuating it. I started this thread in good faith, to have a discussion, and so far, despite your claims about my hostility, I have had entirely cordial discussions with both Mike and Lucky. The only one grand-standing for their audience is you.

You did misrepresent my arguments, and no amount of long-winded hot-air spin-doctoring is going to change that (your weak summary also suggested I thought the Federation fleet was made up of nothing but old crap vessels, which is not what I said or implied. Mike didn't interpret me like that - only you).

You keep referring to a site that has been off-line for several years. Yes, we did have a history - a very brief one. I have had ample opportunity to restore those pages (especially since you pointed out the Wayback Machine), but I haven't done so. Nor did I attempt to reproduce them in the intervening years. If you keep pushing though, you'll get your wish. If you wish to stop playing this game, then by all means, I am happy to return to a reasoned discussion. A lot of that depends on your behaviour.

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Sothis » Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:28 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:You should take more time to respond, no one will think poorly of you for it, and your response here came out a bit messy so it took me a while to sort out what was your most recent reply and what wasn't.
Yeah, that response ending up being garbled. Sorry about that.
Mike DiCenso wrote:Star Wars sensors have never demonstrated the range you require for that, and what you are describing completely is contrary to the TCW movie and series, especially the whole Citadel story arc with the Nexus lane. If the Falcon jumped to hyperspace, then it did not go very far at all, for very long before coming out and then finding a hyperlane to go to and continue on from there.
A micro-jump then? Then again, the Falcon, despite all of her upgrades, is still inherently a civilian craft, without the benefit of military sensors and navigation systems. A Star Destroyer may be able to pull off a bigger jump? I haven't seen the Citadel business so can't pass comment.

So, initially at least, it was going to take 75 years, at maximum speeds. This is a pretty definitive statement from Captain Janeway. Shaving off five years due to navigation data does not make this any less of a decades-long trip.
Mike Dicenso wrote:Sorry, but that is wrong and you are ignoring all the evidence contrary to that:

[b]TORRES:[/b] I've gone over and over the transporter logs. There's no question that if we try to transport ourselves through that wormhole, we'll end up twenty years in the past.
KIM: Then lets do it. It's better than trying to spend the next seventy years trying to get back.


Kim is pretty definitive here as well, too. So the 75 years is down to 70 just a few episodes after "Caretaker". Then there is this after "The Year of Hell":

JANEWAY: I don't buy it. This isn't about your independence or your superiority, this is about your fear. You're not making this choice because you've outgrown humanity. I think you're afraid to go back to Earth. The algorithm's working. It's reconstructing the datablock. That's strange, I thought we already recovered this part of the message.
SEVEN: Perhaps it is an addendum from the Admiral. You did designate him a windbag.
JANEWAY: Oh I don't think so. The data index doesn't match. This is a completely different message.
ADMIRAL HAYES [on monitor]: Apologies from everyone at Starfleet Command. We've had our best people working around the clock, trying to find a wormhole, a new means of propulsion, anything to get you home. But despite our best efforts. I know it's not what you were hoping, but we've sent you all the data we've collected on the Delta Quadrant. With any luck, you'll find at least some part of it useful. Maybe enough to shave a few years off your journey. Safe journey. We hope to see you soon.
SEVEN: Your intuition was correct.
JANEWAY: Unfortunately.


That is from "Hope and Fear", and is the real Starfleet message sent to Voyager, and here, despite the 5 years shaved off in YoH, Hayes and everone in Starfleet hopes that a few more years can be shaved off with additional data. And then there's "Q2" much later on and after the journey has been cut considerably to 30,000 light years:

Q: Oh, before I leave.
(Q gives her a PADD.)
Q: I did a little homework for you. Consider it a thank you for everything you did for Junior.
JANEWAY: Not that I don't appreciate it, but this will only take a few years off our journey. Why not send us all the way?
Q: What sort of an example would I be setting for my son if I did all the work for you?


So Q might well have helped shave a few more years off of everything else, once again disproving that Voyager was only limited to the speeds you claim, and it reinforces my theory about why the speeds are so very much higher in Federation and other well-charted space.
Ok, my initial point was perhaps somewhat nitpicky - Janeway did say it would take 75 years at max speeds in Caretaker, so initially at least, this has the benefit of truth - it is a nitpick on my part though.

And yes, you have displayed clear examples of Voyager cutting travel time via improved navigational data.

However, other, external events also greatly accelerated Voyager. Kes threw the ship 9500LY closer to home in 'The Gift'. The quantum slipstream drive got them another 10,000LY closer in 'Timeless'. A spacial vortex shaved 2500LY off their trip in 'Night'. A Borg transwarp coil took another 15 years off their trip in 'Dark Frontier', and a graviton catapult cut three years off in 'The Voyager Conspiracy'.

The effects of these events factor far more than navigational data in Voyager's journey home.
Sothis wrote:Voyager would often slow down or even stop to poke at various sites of interest on its journey home. And Janeway did not say 'maximum cruise speeds' in Caretaker, only 'maximum speeds'. It is more likely that Voyager cannot sustain warp 9 indefinitely, owing to strain on the engines, and has to slow down periodically to reduce wear and tear.
Mike Dicenso wrote:Certainly Voyager cannot indefinitely sustain warp 9.9 or higher, but we know canonically that the ship was cruising along at warp 6.2 and even went slower still. As for the quote:

STADI: That's our ship. That's Voyager.
(It is docked at an upper pylon.)
STADI: Intrepid class. Sustainable cruise velocity of warp factor nine point nine seven five. Fifteen decks. Crew complement of one hundred and forty one. Bio-neural circuitry.
PARIS: Bio-neural?
STADI: Some of the traditional circuitry has been replaced by gel packs that contain bio-neural cells. They organise information more efficiently, speed up response time.


Its actually maximum sustainable warp velocity is 9.975.
I've always assumed warp 9 for Voyager as a maximum sustainable speed, so I admit to being surprised it's higher. I usually assume warp 9 for the sake of generosity as well - it allows for occasional bursts at warp 9.9 (seen to be much faster than warp 9) that cover more ground over short distances.
Sothis wrote:Fair enough, but appreciate that I work full-time, and I have responsibilities as a father too. On top of that, I have a lot of competing demands on my time, so going through several pages of technical stuff... it's not something I have a lot of time to devote to.
Mike DiCenso wrote:That's nice, but please remember you're not the only one, and like me, you could also take a day or two or even three to get your thoughts and response in order.
Fair enough.
Sothis wrote:The Empire has, according to Expanded Universe sources, 25,000 Star Destroyers at its disposal. They also have an unknown number of support vessels (frigates, destroyers and such), although to patrol a million star systems they presumably have a reasonably sized fleet to do the job. Winner: Empire.
Mike DiCenso wrote:That is now non-canon, of course. But the other ships are never seen rounding out the Imperial fleet, even when it would have made a huge difference (Battle of Yavin, Battle of Hoth, Battle of Endor). Even if it were true, the Empire still would have to keep those smaller ships and a number of ISDs in place, otherwise the Rebels, or other forces would make use of large capital ships, like the Mon Calamari cruisers, and leftover Lucrehulks, among many others.
Well yes, I wrote that part of the site prior to the revision of the EU's status. It nevertheless seems fairly reasonable that an Empire with a million systems and an aggressive approach would want a fleet capable of patrolling and controlling those systems. I agree the Empire couldn't simply uproot loads of them at once, for fear of losing control of local systems. Pinning down precise numbers for Imperial vessels will now, of course, prove difficult. It's going to be interesting to see what the new films have to offer in that respect.
Mike Dicenso wrote:The star destroyers that do make it will be facing Starfleet as well as a wide array of planetary defenses and local defense force fleets. If that isn't bad enough, they'll be still bogged down trying to chart this very alien galaxy, and lord help them if they catch the Borg's notice while they do so.
A lot of how the Imperials deal with Starfleet ships depends on their respective firepower, which I haven't gotten to yet. As for charting the galaxy - I would refer to my position about probes and scout ships. Or they can buy charts from somewhere (throw money at a Ferengi maybe?).
Sothis wrote:They don't need to be aware of the Ninth Fleet as the Ninth Fleet is a non-entity in this fight. They felt the need to commit a 'significant number of ships' to stop what had already been described as 'two large fleets'. It doesn't matter whether the Ninth Fleet was supposed to be a part of this battle or not - it wasn't, and whatever numbers it may have brought, are irrelevant. Weyoun and Dukat are discussing the actual fleets involved, and they are described as 'large' and 'significant'.
Mike DiCenso wrote:Yes, that's technically true, from that context, however, you still miss my point, which is that the Federation had been massing a larger fleet, but the plan was botched due to the unforeseen breakthrough by Damar in bringing down the minefield. That is something you don't want to acknowledge because it goes against your thesis that the Federation could only muster up in total 627 ships, when it was bringing many more. No matter how you try and slice it, the Ninth fleet elements were on their way and would have been there on schedule for the original Operation Return plan.
With respect, I think you're missing the point of my original page - it was not that the Federation couldn't pull together fleets larger than 627, but that to the powers that be, the two fleets combining to form the fleet in Operation Return that actually did head off to fight were regarded as large by the Dominion even before they were combined.
Sothis wrote:Ok fair enough, but I can't help but feel this is nitpicky. You're also assuming Bashir wasn't speaking colloquially. In any event, it doesn't significantly alter the size of the fleet.

I shall have to approach the rest another time, when I have more time.
Mike DiCenso wrote:Hardly, if you look at prior dialog, once Bashir had been outed as an augment, he started showing off, and being hyper precise with his math, not being colloquial at all. Why should we assume any differently here?
-Mike
Why would he be showing off in those particular circumstances? For what it's worth, the novelisation of Sacrifice of Angels refers to the Fed fleet as 592 ships (obviously not canon, but the authors hired to write those novelisations don't share your view that Bashir was being literal).

But, we'll go with your interpretation that he was, and say the fleet was 627 ships.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:20 pm

2046 wrote:No, in context with the previous posts, anything but the Hoth bit that wasn't attacking me was mere restatement or dodging.
In context, yes, he's restating many points, but that's against your attacks, and I think you're both staunchly stuck on each side of the fence. But out of this context, the post really reads like a decent one.
Surely, we would both like things to progress, indeed.
Both of you are correct.
Not possible. I think perhaps you have seen my text poorly quoted in his posts and misunderstood, to wit:
Shoulda say "partially correct".
I understand both views and there's clearly a middle ground.
You say hyperlanes are hugely important, like, erm HUGE.
He says well there's more risk but that's affordable to anyone.
If it weren't for a very few episodes making a big fuss about the hyperlanes, we wouldn't have to imagine things for like all the movies plus the ~98% oif the rest of the show.

For example, how many times do you NOT mention taking a specific kind of road when you're going to go from point A to point B and that's quite a considerable distance between both?
Is it because hyperlanes would be so common that nobody would ever mention them? We take roads for granted yet it's actually rare when someone does not say that they'll take road X, motorway ## or else when covering a long trip (like one hour or more), unless it's so regular that they simply don't mention the route/path anymore.
But most SW events happen on or around worlds which are totally alien to most of the characters featured in each film or episode. The chances that they'd never talk or discuss about the path that's best to take seems highly unlikely unless in normal times, it wasn't such a big problem.
That characters never ever mention taking any specific route the vast majority of the time is quite something. Fact is that we would have never thought about such a concept until it came out of nowhere as part of some plot intrigue.

Where I'm not so hot is on the risk idea. As detailed in my former post, I don't see what's risky about going "off tracks", if there's such a thing.
I mean, aside hitting a star, which is very easy to avoid with decent astromaps, there wouldn't be serious dangers to any astronavigator.
At worse, hyperspace might be influenced by high gravitational mass and travelers might be pulled in in the same way any matter if affected by gravity fields.
So over a long distance, since the computer would tend to aim for the barycenter of a given system by default, I suppose, you would indeed risk being pulled into a star, even if the world you aim for is on the other side of the system.
But other than that, I think it's being overdramatic. I think it's more than a question of risks.
Sothis' point that it may take time, say lots of time, to build a safe passage, especially for an entire fleet, is sound
That is not his claim. He claimed that finding safe passages was very quick. Reference his argument of the Imperials getting to Hoth easily (presupposing that Hoth was somewhere far off-lane), or his claim that "Furthermore, the OT demonstrates off-lane travel is possible, and a matter of using sensors and starcharts to plot a safe route. Luke's passage to Dagobah was a journey to an uncharted world, yet Luke was able to get there. Likewise, Luke was able to get from Dagobah to Bespin in short order (heading from said uncharted world)."

In short, it can be done in the space of the film, he says. Now, he may have also made contrary statements that I'm not recalling, but that's part of the reason I have no patience with him.
Mmm, actually I made a mistake since he said:
Sothis wrote: Again, this is a misrepresentation of my point. Sensors, star charts, probe droids, scouts - all perfectly valid means of circumventing lanes if needs be. Not without greater risk and it may well be slighter slower if you have to wait for data from probes, scouts etc - but entirely possible.
Slighter? I don't think so, that's way too moderate, as I think the difference still needs to be really relevant.

Still, with a world such as Kamino being reached rapidly by Obi-Wan or even the Republic's fleet (to embark clonetroopers) despite that it should logically be located well far from any hyperlane so people could really forget about the whole system, we could infer that there's definitely a possibility for SW ships to get to a given location fast.
But what we're not told, is at what cost. And when I mean cost, I don't mean figuratively. When Yoda took so many ships from Kamino and took them to Geonosis in a heart beat, apparently, it happened at the beginning of the war. I'd argue that at that moment, the Republic wasn't even keeping an eye on the spend as it would months later.

Imagine the talks about how the fleet forcing its way through such unbeaten paths required hyperdrives to be heavily taxed, with hyperfields being barely able to hold on, and in the end, with so many ships needing repairs because of overall damage to their superstructures, flash-pushed into spacedocks for maintainance, sometimes far away since there wasn't room left, many of which proved to be problematic because it meant negociating prices with private owners of construction and repair slips, and the prices went up like crazy across an entire quarter of the galaxy, not to say of all the lost contract with disgruntled clients, some very wealthy, told to leave room because some Republic Cruiser was due to arrive in urgency in a couple hours and just STFU if "you're not with us you're against us" mentality. Not to talk of all the fuel this required (since TPM we know that hyperdrives need to be constantly powered), plus the fact that moving so many ships in one throw made the whole hyperspace band so unstable that the ships at the tail of the fleet could barely handle their course and had to push their hyperdrives harder, some of them forced to "quit the race", do some repairs, redo calculations or arrive late, at the risk of completely ruining the assault's chances of success.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by 2046 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:21 pm

Sothis wrote:
2046 wrote:SNIP huge, long-winded justifications for mispresenting my position, twisting my tone, justification of your own aggression, etc.
I'm not going to waste time pouring over your posturing.


Then don't spend three paragraphs on it filled with dishonest accusation, laughable threats, and other crap. It rather belies your true intent.

If you want me to take you seriously then make a crap-free post that addresses my arguments honestly and without taking multiple positions simultaneously. I will respond to the points worth responding to. I am clearly willing to try to ignore and snip out your crap as demonstrated twice, trying to keep to the meat of the issues, but you insist on shoveling more, and have the gall to call me the badguy. At best, tu quoque.
I have had entirely cordial discussions with both Mike and Lucky.


I am so glad you're minding your manners with them, or so you say (though your PM story with Mike sounded pretty fishy). Of course, you were never obsessed with them, so it figures they wouldn't merit your special love.

Either way, I am unavailable for a week starting this evening, so I'll check in on your progress then.

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Sothis » Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:38 pm

I'm not going to waste time pouring over your posturing.

2046 wrote:Then don't spend three paragraphs on it filled with dishonest accusation, laughable threats, and other crap. It rather belies your true intent.


If you want me to take you seriously then make a crap-free post that addresses my arguments honestly and without taking multiple positions simultaneously. I will respond to the points worth responding to. I am clearly willing to try to ignore and snip out your crap as demonstrated twice, trying to keep to the meat of the issues, but you insist on shoveling more, and have the gall to call me the badguy. At best, tu quoque.
The rate at which I am forced to defend myself against your spurious allegations (which I see further in your post now extends to obsession) is directly proportional to your aggressive posturing and misrepresentations. You started this round of hostile posts, and you're perpetuating it, and I believe that is clear to any prudent individuals reading this.
I have had entirely cordial discussions with both Mike and Lucky.

2046 wrote:I am so glad you're minding your manners with them, or so you say (though your PM story with Mike sounded pretty fishy). Of course, you were never obsessed with them, so it figures they wouldn't merit your special love.

Either way, I am unavailable for a week starting this evening, so I'll check in on your progress then.
[/quote]

I am cordial with Mike and Lucky because they are cordial with me. I don't care what you think of my 'PM story' - your opinion of that is irrelevant. To claim I am obsessed with you is the height of irony, since it's you who keeps bringing up a decade-old defunct website. You didn't even have to participate in this thread - but when you did, you dragged it into a shitfest.

Accordingly, upon your return, I shall only reply to your posts if you make a conscious effort to tone down your rhetoric and posturing, and make an effort to be cordial.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mike DiCenso » Thu Sep 04, 2014 9:47 pm

All right...

Sothis, 2046, you both need to chill out, each of you is baiting the other, and this is going to no good end. If you want to continue debating, then fine, but stop this one-upmanship in the aggression part. Leave your past history with each other where it belongs... in the past.

Thank you
-Mike

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Sothis » Thu Sep 04, 2014 10:02 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:All right...

Sothis, 2046, you both need to chill out, each of you is baiting the other, and this is going to no good end. If you want to continue debating, then fine, but stop this one-upmanship in the aggression part. Leave your past history with each other where it belongs... in the past.

Thank you
-Mike
You're absolutely right of course, and I've sent 2046 a message via his blog to that effect. I hope to reply to more of your material soon (which is going to be a lot easier now I have my laptop working again!), but as you may have seen, I've been busy developing my Terminator pages on my site. Don't know why, but something piqued my desire to do it.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Sep 05, 2014 5:43 pm

Yes, well that reply is a bit on hold until this matter between you two is fully resolved as I have to step out of being a debater, and into being a referee.
-Mike

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Sep 06, 2014 5:27 pm

Guys, I'm all out for your thoughts about what constitutes danger in hyperspace travel and what the hell hyperlanes are supposed to be, really.

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: I don't know if this is the right place...

Post by Trinoya » Thu Sep 18, 2014 5:30 am

Debate away Mike, I'll keep an eye on the thread. ^_^

Post Reply